User talk:George Ho/Archives/2016/4

A barnstar for you!

The Resilient Barnstar

Hi George, I think you should stay. You might want to take a little time off, but do that and come back! Everyone who wants to work here and tries to makes a positive difference. We all make mistakes-the losers are the ones who claim they never make any and those who won't admit that they do. A couple of the admirable things about you are that you never stop trying and aren't afraid to speak up when you think something is wrong. Don't get so focused on being an admin because there are a lot of good editors who've been here a while and who don't ever want to become an admin. Not being an admin doesn't make an editor any less. So, friend, how about sticking around and being the best George Ho, Wikipedia editor that you can be? Nobody else can fill that spot-only you. :-) We hope (talk) 12:08, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

My major final task for Wikipedia (delaying my planned exit)

I wanted to leave soon, but I guess I must improve pages related to Cheers and Frasier. This would delay my intended exit to months, like several to one year. I could do other tasks, like verified sexual identity, images of first editions, and copy editing, but they are just minor. --George Ho (talk) 21:25, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

George, this is becoming stupid now, you're either leaving (and no-one is suggesting you should, although a break would be well advised) or you're working on stuff for up to a year. Either way you are not doing yourself any favours with this pregnant pause and pseudo-quit, it's embarrassing and time-wasting. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:36, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

I'm at loss at one of your latest disdains toward me, especially when you said "pseudo-quit". I'm not kidding about quitting actually, but... what's the point of convincing you? I don't have enough friends to convince me to stay in Wikipedia, anyway. I don't know how to be a better, greater person in Wikipedia than I am enough to stay here for years. No matter... Rules are too tough to change because they work too well and become tools for bureaucracy, especially WP:NFCC. Either I finish all the way through Frasier (season 11) or just a few seasons, like Cheers (season 7). If I want to stay forever, I could work on I Love Lucy and other things, but I can't. Researching for Wikipedia is currently too time-consuming to do for older television series and other millennial topics, like old events. Also, I got real-life things to do, like college and finding a job. If I can actually meet anybody a Wikipedian in-person, maybe I could change my mind about leaving Wikipedia. But that's just an ideal. --George Ho (talk) 02:06, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Is there a rule against saying repeatedly I am exiting, either seriously or kiddingly? George Ho (talk) 02:12, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Of course not; but see WP: HIGHMAINT for how it could be perceived. _Muffled ^Pocketed 04:38, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

I still have no clue what you're talking about. If you intend to work on for another year, that's not exactly quitting is it? Time to stop pretending: WP:HIGHMAINT is worth reading. The Rambling Man (talk) 05:20, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Think what you will. I'm too tired to convince you that I am not pretending to quit but that I want to quit. George Ho (talk) 05:29, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Personally, I think focusing on Cheers and Frasier is a great plan; almost like a break; take as long as you need. Dicklyon (talk) 05:27, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Arbcom case you might be interested in

I just filed an arbitration request against The Rambling Man, citing an example in which you were involved in. You might be interested in the case. Link is here: [1]. Thanks, Banedon (talk) 05:16, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

TRM case

How are you deciding who to notify? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 17:08, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

What do you mean, Neil? I looked up TRM's encounters with those people. --George Ho (talk) 17:10, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Please stop. This is too close to canvassing. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 17:12, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Neil, can you allow me to notify those who would defend him to prove to you that I'm neither massively posting nor making a bias campaigning? --George Ho (talk) 17:24, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

There's no need to notify. Based on your criteria - TRM's encounters with those people - TRM has had encounters with hundreds if not thousands of editors. Are you going to notify them all? No. Also, you are far from a neutral party here. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 17:28, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

How is ignoring canvassing rule not improving Wikipedia? --George Ho (talk) 17:30, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

If you have to explicitly invoke WP:IAR to allow your canvassing then you know what you're doing is heavily discouraged. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 17:35, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

And hey, some of those I notified posted their statements at the case request. But I'll stop if you want me to... until you allow me? George Ho (talk) 17:38, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

No. Stop. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 17:39, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

August 2016

It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on a biased choice of users' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote—in order to influence Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#The_Rambling_Man. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. Thank you. Amortias (T)(C) 19:07, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Your statement at TRM Arbitration page

A video reply to your comments: Here. Just sayin. 2600:8806:4800:5100:6400:3368:F52B:B74D (talk) 23:18, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Party to TRM case

A member of the Arbitration Committee has directed that you be added as a party to the The Rambling Man arbitration case request. Therefore:

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#The Rambling Man and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted in most arbitration pages please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.

Thanks,

For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 22:44, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Statement at Arbitraion reqeusts page

Hi, George Ho. I'm an arbitration clerk, which means I help manage and administer the arbitration process (on behalf of the committee). Thank you for making a statement in an arbitration request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case. However, we ask all participants and commentators to limit the size of their initial statements to 500 words. Your statement significantly exceeds this limit. Please reduce the length of your statement when you are next online. If the case is accepted, you will have the opportunity to present more evidence; and concise, factual statements are much more likely to be understood and to influence the decisions of the Arbitrators.

Requests for extensions of the word limit may be made either in your statement or by email to the Committee through this link or arbcom-llists.wikimedia.org if email is not available through your account.

For the Arbitration Committee, Amortias (T)(C) 12:20, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

One for the Road (Cheers)

Hello:

The copy edit that you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article One for the Road (Cheers) has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 12:47, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanksgiving Orphans

Hello:

The copy edit that you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Thanksgiving Orphans has been completed.

I did make one change to the plot section for consistency. You originally wrote that: " Woody (Woody Harrelson) is still in Indiana, away from his family." Later he is mentioned as being part of the food fight. In order to fix this inconsistency I have changed the sentence to read: "Woody (Woody Harrelson) is not visiting his family in Indiana." I trust this works for you.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 20:49, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Confirmation

Hello again, I just needed your confirmation upon some covert arts for some articles that needed to be added OR replaced, which are "You Are Not Alone", "Like a Prayer", The Spirit Room (2001), Butterfly (1997), and "Daydream".

• "You Are Not Alone" - The Reason why the cover art on this page needs to be replaced is because it is the UK CD artwork, in which Michael Jackson was an American, therefore we should change the artwork towards his more familiar country into this commercial artwork. CLICK TO SEE ARTWORK.
• "Like a Prayer" - The artwork in the infobox should be replaced with a Cassette single cover because the CD commercial single artwork looks plain and awkward. The cassette artwork is imo more suitable plus the song was released in the late 1980's, when Cassettes were a dominant format, the picture of Madonna was meant to fit the size of a Cassette, not a CD single. CLICK HERE TO SEE ARTWORK
• The Spirit Room - This artwork is actually the official and commercial artwork used for the CD releases, but is not seen on digital retailers for uncertain reasons, TV talk shows in which Branch met with promoted this album artwork. The artwork for the original CD release on Discogs is not very good, so I might as well be willing to use a digitally remastered artwork I did myself here or at albumartexchange.com both has better quality and resolution of the original artwork.
• Butterfly - I hope you know that Butterfly had TWO COVERS that were either reversible or alternative and they were both official. One of them should be added to the bottom.
• Daydream - Simply, whoever uploaded this artwork didn't care how it looked. Based on other artworks that were released compared to this one, they're were actually a bit...brighter...

I just need your confirmation of these changes or additions. I really do not mind doing these myself. troublednbored (talk) 20:44, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

@ Smarty9108:

• "Like a Prayer" CD/vinyl cover is similar to the cassette one. That wouldn't be necessary as majority prefer square covers over vertical wide ones. Let's not replace it yet until those at WT:WPMU said yes to it.
• Unsure about The Spirit Room, but let's not do that yet. Ask them there.
• Extra cover of Butterfly is not necessary. Adding another alternative cover requires adding prose and then sources discussing the images themselves. Don't do that yet.
• Do you have a copy of Daydream CD? If so, and if you have a scanner, scan the front cover. Otherwise, ask for improvements at WP:GL/P.
• As for the Michael Jackson song, I'll do it for you and then add captions.

If you want to ask more, go to WP:MCQ. In other words, I'll not confirm your proposed changes, but I'll do the first one instead. George Ho (talk) 21:05, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

File:You Raise Me Up by Josh Groban US CD promo.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:You Raise Me Up by Josh Groban US CD promo.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:50, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Arbitration Case opened

You were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/The Rambling Man. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/The Rambling Man/Evidence. Please add your evidence by September 17, 2016, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/The Rambling Man/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration.

For the Arbitration Committee,

Amortias (T)(C) 10:09, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Sam Pancake

I know there's always the temptation to overdo it when it comes to sexuality-related content for safety's sake, but I'm not seeing how what you've already added there wouldn't be enough. Some people overinflate the "relevant to the person's public life" condition to mean it has to have some deep and profound implications that can be felt throughout their entire body of work, but really the only condition that has to be met in a BLP is that the person is reliably sourceable as being out, rather than describing or categorizing people as gay on the basis of assumptions or unsourced insider knowledge or gossip. Bearcat (talk) 01:05, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

The notability of a person's sexuality is fully established by the simple fact that they've put it on the record in a public fashion by coming out. Other than taking the issue of the closet into account, it really needn't be much more complicated than it is for describing and categorizing Hillary Clinton or Theresa May as female, or describing and categorizing Jay Z or LeBron James as African American — the fact that it's properly sourceable as true, and not insinuated on the basis of hearsay or gossip, is enough. Their articles don't have to contain deep analysis of the specific impact that their gender or race has had on their careers — although content like that can certainly be added where it's useful and relevant and sourceable, it's not a base condition that has to be met before we can file Theresa May in Category:British women in politics or LeBron in Category:African-American basketball players. The fact that we can properly source that the category is true is all the "significance" that has to be demonstrated for the category to be present — and it's the same for LGBT people so long as we're not outing someone who hasn't already put their sexual identity on the public record in reliable sources. The act of coming out, in and of itself, makes it relevant enough to their public life for our article to note and categorize them accordingly. Bearcat (talk) 02:17, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Seven Whole Days 12-inch US vinyl maxi-single.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Seven Whole Days 12-inch US vinyl maxi-single.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:12, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Alan kurdi smiling playground.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Alan kurdi smiling playground.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Majora (talk) 21:23, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Please see this message

Please see this message. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 08:21, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Competence is not required

Wikipedia:Competence is not required, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Competence is not required and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Competence is not required during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. GoldenRing (talk) 14:38, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Competence

What exactly is your concern about competence, other than the need to give good-faith editors a chance to learn Wikipedia? Giving good-faith editors a chance to learn Wikipedia is Do not bite the newcomers. The problem is that good faith is not quite enough because there must also be a willingness to try to learn the complexities and subtleties of Wikipedia and a willingness to try to become competent. What is your precise issue? Robert McClenon (talk) 18:02, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

A similar issue to having three different banners at the top of one's talk page saying 'Due to XYZ I will be away'... and then making 350 edits in the last month, perhaps? Not very away, much. _Muffled ^Pocketed 18:09, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

I didn't see this reply, so I apologize for replying a little late. Requiring competence has been recommended, Robert. However, this affects an editor's self-esteem and boosts administrator's ego. That's all I can think about. Also, evaluating print materials about one topic when online sources about that topic are absent is a lot more time-consuming. Promoting that article with just print sources... can be basic or discomforting. As for me taking a "break", I did intend to take a break. However, I see full of unrest in Wikipedia. I must put a time off activities for quite some time. Also, I have college work, which I mostly neglected due to Wikipedia. --George Ho (talk) 21:36, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

To reflect the current status, I changed the banners. --George Ho (talk) 21:46, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

The Rambling Man arbitration proposed decision posted

A proposed decision has been posted in the open The Rambling Man arbitration page. Please review this decision and draw the arbitrators' attention to any relevant material or statements. Comments may be brought to the attention of the committee on the proposed decision talk page. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. If you are not a party, you may opt out of further notifications regarding this case at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/The Rambling Man/Mass Message List. For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:36, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:You Raise Me Up by Josh Groban US CD promo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:You Raise Me Up by Josh Groban US CD promo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:07, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

RFC Comment

Hello George, in your See also RFC, could you add sections for responses and discussion per WP:RFC? Thank you,CuriousMind01 (talk) 12:45, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi, CuriousMind01. Maybe let's wait for one person to comment. Also, the page says I can either use subsections or make the thread simple. Also, the "See also" section is nothing compared to other article content. In short, I will do it if the discussion is getting too busy before it becomes busy. --George Ho (talk) 21:35, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Chandra Levy homicide

OK. Obviously I disagree with the result of the close but it seems that consensus has been reached for now and I'm not going to appeal that (I think one of the last !voters made the point that I should have made from the get-go ... that the structure of the article makes very clear that it's about her death, not her life).

I wasn't aware of the ongoing ArbCom restrictions you were under ... sorry.

Really, though, I think this demonstrates that we should have this discussion more generally at either (or both) WT:DEATH or WT:NC. Maybe when the ArbCom case is over, though. Daniel Case (talk) 02:50, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

I'll consider the higher trafficked pages. When I'm up for that discussion for a long term. I generally prefer creating content to discussing policy. Now back to your break . Daniel Case (talk) 03:11, 4 October 2016 (UTC)